death penalty

7 petitions

Update posted 1 year ago

Petition to Malcolm Turnbull

Plebiscite Regarding the Return of Capital Punishment to the Commonwealth of Australia

It was 1967, Victoria, when the last execution took place in Australia. Now fifty years later, our nation has abolished the use of capital punishment, prohibited individual state governments from reintroducing it, and let heinous crimes take place without prevention. In fifty years, we have seen so much advancement, heard so many voices, and watched the generations change. Humans have adapted to so many new things: technology, communication, cultures. Yet the federal government still believes that in all this time, the death penalty is not applicable. That men like Arthur Alliband, a convicted rapist, should be allowed to walk free after a small prison sentence and ruin the life of yet another young Australian girl. In March 2016, Arthur was released after 18 months from a 31 month sentence on parole. According to NSW Corrective Services, sentences less than 3 years do not require prisoners to be assessed and approved by the State Parole Authority. This is what allowed Arthur to walk free, and mere hours later after his release, sexually assault a 16 year old girl in Sydney on his way home from jail. That such a person, who was previously convicted with two counts of sexual assault on an underage girl, should be allowed to walk free is a clear failure of our justice system, and proves the inadequacy of current sentences for sex offenders. Fifty years ago, parents could rest easy while their sons and daughters walked to a friends house, or caught the train home. Fifty years later, this is not so, and still courts are forced to abide by out-of-date laws, preventing the death penalty from being given to rapists, murders, and terrorsits. The United Nations has worked hard to push for a world where capital punishment is erradicated, believing that due to possible mis-sentencing and the questioable nature of taking a human, it has no place in modern society. An argument of morality is hypocritical however, when by not executing men like Arthur Alliband, the legal systems lets not only one Australian daughter be abused, but two. When did sexual assault, of a child warrant a mere 31 months? When did a repeated offence, with another child warrant only a maximum of 54 months? That is the sentence that the judge passed on, wishing Arthur the best with his treatment. A poll in 2015 showed that 52.5 percent of a small majority of Australians believed that capital punishment should be reintroduced. The federal government, and even past Prime Ministers have shared this conflicting belief that the death penalty is applicable in some circumstances. Tony Abbott said that some crimes really make you question whether rehabilitation is possible, or even deserved, and if execution is perhaps the best avenue. John Howard, made a statement that if the Indonesian law stated that the Bali bombers should face death, than that law should be respected, but it was under his administration that over 100 members of parliament wrote to the Indonesian government to spare the lives of the two Bali Nine leaders that were sentenced to death. Barnaby Joyce also made news when suggesting that capital punishment should be discussed once again for Australia's future. With an indecisive government, and an Australian majority in favour of it's reintroduction, it is time for a compulsory national plebiscite to take place. This will allow the Australia public to be heard in their need for a reviewal of the capital punishment laws, and allow disgusting criminals like Arthur Alliband face the punishment that they clearly deserve.  

Stephen Poole
103 supporters
Update posted 1 year ago

Petition to Prime Minister Mian Mohammad Nawaz Sharif

Release and Repatriate Kulbhushan Jadhav

Mr Kulbhushan Jadhav a 46 year old Indian national and a former Indian Navy officer and currently a business man, travelled to the Chabahar Port area of Iran on a valid visa in or around February 2016 during the course of his business. This was not Mr Jadav's first visit to Iran; he had previously travelled to Iran on business. He has businesses based in Mumbai, India and in Iran. Mr Kulbhushan Jadhav failed to return to the place he was staying in Iran during this visit. It is believed that he was captured by a disperate group in the volatile region on the border between Iran and Pakistan. It is believed that Mr Kulbhushan Jadhav was targeted because he is an Indian national and formerly, an Officer in the Indian Navy. Mr Kulbhushan Jadhav was most likely handed to the Pakistani authorities by these Iranian groups in exchange for a reward. This is an accepted practice in the region. Reports support that Mr Kulbhushan Jadhav was kidnapped inside Iran by drug smugglers or by extremist group Jundullah with the support of Inter-Services Intelligence and handed over to Pakistan’s spy agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence. The narco-terrorist networks are at play in the region and merit additional scrutiny which evidently, Mr Kulbhushan Jadhav did not have. Media reports suggest that Mr Kulbhushan Jadhav was received into the Pakistani authorities on the 3rd of March, 2016. He was accused of "espionage and sabotage activities against Pakistan". This is a standard charge against Indian nationals who have strayed accidentally or by force into Pakistani territory. Following a summary trial in a closed Court (not in public), Mr Kulbhushan Jadhav was convicted of the charges laid against him, namely of: "espionage and sabotage activities against Pakistan". He was tried "through Field General Court Martial under the Pakistan Army Act PAA) and awarded the death sentence" according to Pakistan's Inter Services Public Relations statement released on Monday 10th of April, 2017. No indication was disclosed in relation to the execution Concerns:Mr Kulbhushan Jadhav's execution is imminent. By their own admission, there is lack of tangible evidence that Mr Kulbhushan Jadhav is a 'spy'. This was admitted by the Pakistani authorities and their Foreign Minister Sartaz Aziz: Mr Kulbhushan Jadhav was tried in a military court even although he is a civilian.  The Pakistani authorities have not produced any forensic evidence linking Mr Jadhav to the alleged attacks in Pakistan that he supposed to be responsible for. Mr Jadhav's case is following the path of Mr Sarabjit Singh's case who was also convicted of 'esponiage' in very similar circumstances (Note:  Since his detention, Mr Kulbhushan Jadhav has been DENIED: 1. Access to Consular service despite repeated requests by the Indian authorities. At least sixteen formal requests have been made by the Indian authorities; 2. Access to independent legal advice; 3. Immediate access to an independent medical examination and assessment of his mental and physical condition. Access to the Red Cross. Mr Kulbhushan Jadhav has not been seen in public for over a year. 4. Contact with his family since his detention in or around March, 2016; 5. Contact with his Government; 6. Disclosure of the alleged evidence against him; Disclosure of the Prosecution's case, copy pleadings and forensic reports in support of their case; 7. Evidence that the death sentence was made following a judgment rendered by a competent Court - ICCPR (international Covenant on Civil and Political Rights) article 6, para. 2; 8. Fair trial; Mr Kulbhushan Jadhav's trial was conducted in Urdu - not the language spoken by Mr Jadhav; 9. Access to legal representation: Mr Kulbhushan Jadhav did not have legal representation and he was not provided with a copy of the case papers in relation to the case against him. The Pakistani media alleges that Mr Kulbhushan Jahdev has a 'right to appeal' and yet he has not been provided with the case papers and/or supporting evidence against him. Further, he has been denied access to an independent lawyer. So how can he be expected to assess and evaluate the case against him and exercise his alleged right to appeal without sight of the case against him?  10. His human rights, dignity and respect under international Conventions and law in relation to human rights. Mr Kulbhushan Jadhav is mostly likely to have been tortured as part of his interrogation by the Pakistani intelligence agencies. The undated video released by the Pakistani authorities in which Mr Jadhav 'confesses' to 'espionage' clearly indicates a confession obtained under duress. It is claimed that the video recording has been edited at least 127 times.  The Pakistani authorities have made much of Mr Kulbhushan Jadav's passport; neither his video or his alleged passport has been subjected to independent examination and/or forensic interrogation by appropriate experts  in accordance with the standards of evidence deemed to be admissible in Court. No further and/or recent video recordings of Mr Kulbhushan Yadhav have been released. His current physical and mental state is unknown. The Pakistani authorities must produce Mr Kulbhushan Jadhav in public and they must ensure that he has Consular access and facilitate his right to take independent legal advice. The case against Mr Kulbhushan Jadhav lacks facts and is solely based upon the Pakistani authorities' intense animosity and belligerency towards Indian nationals who have had the misfortune of entering Pakistani terroritory and  ended being detained. So far in this case, the Pakistani authorities have demonstrated a  blatant disregard and disrespect for the Rule of Law. We the undersigned urge the Prime Minister of Pakistan, Mr Mian Mohammad Nawaz Sharif to release and repatriate Mr Kulbhushan Jadhav to his family in India. Further reading:Kulbhushan Jadhav: India to do 'whatever it takes' to help 'spy'

Justice Upheld
194 supporters